In the recent times, two approaches which have shaped some significant studies on colonial Northeast India are: the idea of incoherence of empire, and circulatory networks or circulation. Highlighting the conceptual departures they contain, this article is also an attempt to revisit the two approaches by drawing attention to some of the broader questions that these approaches need to take into account. For example, vis-à-vis the region, how does the idea of incoherence or that of circulation extend the understanding of imperial accumulation of power and capital at a global scale. Further, if structuring of areas in imperial processes operates at different spatial scales, then how does de-centring these scales (as in the two approaches) enable one to identify what is imperialism as far as the region is concerned. The two approaches of incoherence of empire and circulation have also foregrounded the question of highlands. As such, the article argues that coherence or incoherence could have different loci. While at one level, certain areas of the region (whether plains, foothills or highlands) could be understood in terms of empire’s coherence there could be other areas, especially highlands, which tend to exhibit features of relative incoherence in this regard. However, as the chapter argues, if the vantage point of examination is empire and the fact of its presence (however limited or informal), then is it possible to look into combinations of processes to understand how such combinations could be oriented towards imperial accumulation of power (and capital) across these different kinds of areas that comprised colonial Northeast India
Manjeet Baruah (Mon,) studied this question.